The Movie (and TV show) Watching Thread

[John Dule]

Love Lies Bleeding (2024)
director Rose Glass

7.5 out of 10

Very very good. If you wondering if you should see it, ask yourself if this sounds good to you: gay A24 neo-noir 80s acid western.

Also, this is one of those movies that has at least one thing if not more that could be considered a big spoiler, so try to go in to the movie knowing as little as possible.

I liked this too. Not sure if it was the script or for muscle mommy reasons though.

[T'Chenka]

3 Body Problem
season 1 (2024, Netflix)

7 ( almost 8 ) / 10

This is a really good but also flawed show. The ingredients for an amazing show are there, and it's very often good or very good, but the second half of the season takes the show in odd and underwhelming directions. A lot of people are probably going to dislike the second half of the season, but I personally liked (not loved) it. Another key issue for me is that many of the characters just aren't given interesting enough things to do at times. It makes for a competent and watchable show, but not necessarily exciting or interest some of the time. Acting ranges from "kind of good" to "very good". Directing is very good. Musical score is very good. Techs are good, not amazing.

FINAL VERDICT - A good / very good television season that's flawed and might lose some audience members by the end. If you like these kinds of shows in general, or if you like sci-fi stuff, this is strongly recommended. You just have to curb your expectations to a reasonable level.

[THG]

The Sopranos is so good man.

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

Rewatched the Kill Bill movies over the last two nights. They weren’t my favorites of Tarantino’s when I saw them and they definitely weren’t this time either. The second one especially just wasn’t doing it for me—it basically ended up being background noise.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Rewatched the Kill Bill movies over the last two nights. They weren’t my favorites of Tarantino’s when I saw them and they definitely weren’t this time either. The second one especially just wasn’t doing it for me—it basically ended up being background noise.

For me the first one is by far the worst thing Tarantino ever made. It's the equivalent of cinematic masturbation.

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

Rewatched the Kill Bill movies over the last two nights. They weren’t my favorites of Tarantino’s when I saw them and they definitely weren’t this time either. The second one especially just wasn’t doing it for me—it basically ended up being background noise.

For me the first one is by far the worst thing Tarantino ever made. It's the equivalent of cinematic masturbation.

I actually liked the first one more than the second. Wasn’t expecting that, but there was at least more action in it. It kind of seemed like parts of the first should’ve been in the second and vice-versa. I mean, the movie says why she went after O-Ren Ishii first, but it set the tone for more action that the second just didn’t really deliver on.

[vitoNova]

I've started warming up to Inglorious Basterds, and asked Copilot the song that played with Sgt Donny Donowitz and PFC Omar Whatever infiltrated the theater, and it came back with David Bowie's "Cat People", which I automatically knew was absolutely not correct.  

The song is "The Devil's Rumble" by Davie Allow and the Arrows.

It's quite intense.  

[Meclazine for Israel]

Went to the cinema with my partner and watched a film called The Zone of Interest.



Certainly worthy of it's Academy Award.

Nearly a decade ago, the maker of this film, Jonathan Glazer, made a sci-fi alien film with Scarlet Johansson based in Scotland. Very dark film.

This time, he throws us into a tranquil setting just outside the Polish WW2 Concentration camp of Auschwitz.

It is one of the first films to present Auschwitz in a manner of 'normalisation'. People go about their business like a normal 9 to 5 job.

Most films (taking nothing away from the masterpiece Schindler's List) on the topic present a dire, colourless, macabre situation with sad music.

To the locals and the German workforce and military, this film presents a complete upheaval of that situation and everything appears normal, almost.

This technique enables the pure horror of the situation to develop.

The main character is hell bent on engineering a streamlined process for the most efficient eridaction of the Jewish population.

It appears as though he was focussed on Auschwitz in competition with many other concentration camps to see who could outperform the other.

When he showed a degree of proficiency, the senior Nazi leadership then sent him a million Jews fresh from Hungary.

This is an amazing film.

The Zone Of Interest Trailer (2024)

https://youtu.be/r-vfg3KkV54

[GoTfan]

Saw The Great Escaper the other day. Review incoming after work.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Anyone else watch the 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' finale?

I had a feeling that they were building up to a meta joke about the 'Seinfeld' finale, and that's what we got. I enjoyed it as a fitting end to one of my favorite shows. I do think there was a missed opportunity with Richard Lewis' girlfriend. I really thought they were going to ger dark and have her actual try to assassinate Larry after he got out of jail.

[T'Chenka]

I saw the new english-hindi action movie Monkey Man.

It was pretty good. Basically a John Wick type of deal, but with more drama, more politics, lower budget. I would definitely recommend it as it's very good, but I'm also seeing some people overhyping it. Keep the expectations low to medium and you should be fine.

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

I watched The Kill Room. Box office receipts: $724,285.

By the numbers:
Producers: 10
Co-Producers: 5
Executive Producers: 40
Co-Executive Producers: 7

I think Uma Thurman took a movie she did 18 years before and ran with the plot of that while thumbing her nose at us the whole time.

File under so bad that you’re laughing at it for most of it and then laughing at the credits because I’m willing to bet that the movie was meant to lose money for all 62 producers. Completely overacted by everyone. Like I know Uma Thurman and Samuel L. Jackson can make a good movie and be good actors. Jury’s out on Maya Hawke (who wasn’t in this as much as I had hoped), but she might’ve had the least overdone performance because it didn’t feel like she was faking it.

It’s certainly not a 5 star movie (despite what my Letterboxd says), but it entertained me.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Election, 1999, starring Reese Witherspoon, Matthew Broderick, Jessica Campbell (RIP) and Chris Klein.

Finally saw this. Not quite what I was expecting, but very smart and entertaining. 8.5/10

Spoilers
There seems to be some dispute as to the point the film is making. Some say it's about politics, some say it's about the 'American dream' and I say it's simply about two conflicting personalities, albeit, as the film is a satire, hyperbolically exaggerated personalities.

It seems I've already been beaten to writing that Tracy Flick was misunderstood.

For those not familiar Reese Witherspoon plays Tracy Flick, a high school student overachiever who decides to run for student council President. Matthew Broderick plays Jim McAllister an American history and civics teacher who is responsible for overseeing the student council including the student council elections.

As such, had Tracy Flick won the election, as she tells him, she and he would be working closely together the next school year. For at least a couple reasons McAllister does not like Tracy Flick, and this realization sends him searching for an opponent who can beat her in the election.

He hopes he's found such a person in Paul Metzler played by Chris Klein. He is the popular school football quarterback who suffered a leg injury skiing and is depressed that he can no longer play football. McAllister tells him that he can find a purpose putting his energy into the student council instead.

There is also additional story involving Paul's sister played by Jessica Campbell who enters the election at the last minute.

Anyway, the main reason McAllister doesn't like Flick is because he regards her as an overachiever who wants to impress everybody with her perfection and accomplishment. This is where the notion that the film is about 'the American dream' comes from (which I don't disagree, but I don't think is complete.)

McAllister is an idealist who wants to be a teacher to improve the lives of the young people he taught if not the world. Flick, in contrast, is an achiever who wants to accomplish things, and they could be anything, for personal gain and a sense of achievement.

In short, these are two conflicting personalities with completely different attitudes on 'the meaning of life.' This wasn't the only movie around this time to explore this, but such films as American Beauty and, in its own way, The Big Lebowski ("sh**t yeah, the achievers") also went into this. The difference is, the countering character in those films were, or wanted to be, "slackers", whereas McAllister was a success, having accomplished his goal not only of becoming a teacher, but winning the 'best teacher of the year' at the school a record number of times.

All of the characters are given voiceovers, and to Tracy Flick though, this is no success, but she disparages McAllister for 'doing the same thing year after year with no change.' McAllister doesn't disparage Flick like that right until the end of the film, but it's clear that he is concerned about her 'work/life balance'.

As far as I'm concerned, the reason the film is set in a high school is because this is the one place where a person like McAllister could have some control over a person like Tracy Flick, and the reason the plot revolves around an election is simply because getting elected student council president is the highest visible achievement a high school student can have.

The film has several dramatic turns for the characters, all of whom are flawed like actual humans, but probably the most important is when Tracy Flick tries to get a corner of one of her large election posters to stay up properly. She turns over a garbage can to get up to the corner and, when the garbage can slides she falls off ripping her own poster and nearly breaking her leg in the process. This was likely meant as an allusion to when Paul Metzler broke his leg skiing. Some write ups on the film say that she decided to cheat at this point and rips down (nearly) all the election posters, but I think otherwise. There is a similar scene in American Beauty where the perfectionist achiever played by Annette Bening gets frustrated and destroys something. Similarly, I think Tracy is simply frustrated with herself for being so stupid as to use an overturned garbage can on a school surface to get up on and for nearly breaking her leg and for ripping her poster, and she acts out this frustration by ripping up all the election posters she sees.

So, the thing is, Tracy Flick is actually not a bad person, she's no sociopath. At one point she expresses genuine concern for Jim McAlister, she's just a person from a lower middle class background (single mother who worked her way up to become a paralegal) who did not get any breaks and who wants to live what she regards as the American dream (or has been told is the American dream.) She even recognizes that she's sacrificing being popular and having fun to become successful because she works very hard and simply can't stand not getting what she wants and puts in a lot of work for.

In contrast is Paul whose multimillionaire father owns a very large cement plant. He is a genuinely nice person, but he doesn't recognize his privilege (for those who think that's a new concept) because he's stupid. I don't know if the writer of the film was trying to make the cynical point that the only people who are nice are stupid.

The reality is nature favors diversity and the world needs both idealists like McAlister and driven achievers like Flick, as flawed as they both are. The film expresses reservations with how tough achievers can be, but certainly Tracy Flick would be a much better CEO to the world than Elon Musk.

So, anyway, a very thought provoking movie, and I've left out most of the story. But, the film is also very funny even if not, for me, laugh out loud funny.

Edit to add: It's interesting how movies can get reevaluated in the same way as presidential administrations. There are some views that the character of Jim McAllister was never the idealist whose desire was to be a teacher that he told us he was, but that his character was a charming liar the whole time, including in his voice overs, and that he actually was probably never anything more than a slacker (and a creep) who 'settled' on becoming a teacher because it was a job.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Election, 1999, starring Reese Witherspoon, Matthew Broderick, Jessica Campbell (RIP) and Chris Klein.

Finally saw this. Not quite what I was expecting, but very smart and entertaining. 8.5/10

Spoilers
There seems to be some dispute as to the point the film is making. Some say it's about politics, some say it's about the 'American dream' and I say it's simply about two conflicting personalities, albeit, as the film is a satire, hyperbolically exaggerated personalities.

It seems I've already been beaten to writing that Tracy Flick was misunderstood.

For those not familiar Reese Witherspoon plays Tracy Flick, a high school student overachiever who decides to run for student council President. Matthew Broderick plays Jim McAllister an American history and civics teacher who is responsible for overseeing the student council including the student council elections.

As such, had Tracy Flick won the election, as she tells him, she and he would be working closely together the next school year. For at least a couple reasons McAllister does not like Tracy Flick, and this realization sends him searching for an opponent who can beat her in the election.

He hopes he's found such a person in Paul Metzler played by Chris Klein. He is the popular school football quarterback who suffered a leg injury skiing and is depressed that he can no longer play football. McAllister tells him that he can find a purpose putting his energy into the student council instead.

There is also additional story involving Paul's sister played by Jessica Campbell who enters the election at the last minute.

Anyway, the main reason McAllister doesn't like Flick is because he regards her as an overachiever who wants to impress everybody with her perfection and accomplishment. This is where the notion that the film is about 'the American dream' comes from (which I don't disagree, but I don't think is complete.)

McAllister is an idealist who wants to be a teacher to improve the lives of the young people he taught if not the world. Flick, in contrast, is an achiever who wants to accomplish things, and they could be anything, for personal gain and a sense of achievement.

In short, these are two conflicting personalities with completely different attitudes on 'the meaning of life.' This wasn't the only movie around this time to explore this, but such films as American Beauty and, in its own way, The Big Lebowski ("sh**t yeah, the achievers") also went into this. The difference is, the countering character in those films were, or wanted to be, "slackers", whereas McAllister was a success, having accomplished his goal not only of becoming a teacher, but winning the 'best teacher of the year' at the school a record number of times.

All of the characters are given voiceovers, and to Tracy Flick though, this is no success, but she disparages McAllister for 'doing the same thing year after year with no change.' McAllister doesn't disparage Flick like that right until the end of the film, but it's clear that he is concerned about her 'work/life balance'.

As far as I'm concerned, the reason the film is set in a high school is because this is the one place where a person like McAllister could have some control over a person like Tracy Flick, and the reason the plot revolves around an election is simply because getting elected student council president is the highest visible achievement a high school student can have.

The film has several dramatic turns for the characters, all of whom are flawed like actual humans, but probably the most important is when Tracy Flick tries to get a corner of one of her large election posters to stay up properly. She turns over a garbage can to get up to the corner and, when the garbage can slides she falls off ripping her own poster and nearly breaking her leg in the process. This was likely meant as an allusion to when Paul Metzler broke his leg skiing. Some write ups on the film say that she decided to cheat at this point and rips down (nearly) all the election posters, but I think otherwise. There is a similar scene in American Beauty where the perfectionist achiever played by Annette Bening gets frustrated and destroys something. Similarly, I think Tracy is simply frustrated with herself for being so stupid as to use an overturned garbage can on a school surface to get up on and for nearly breaking her leg and for ripping her poster, and she acts out this frustration by ripping up all the election posters she sees.

So, the thing is, Tracy Flick is actually not a bad person, she's no sociopath. At one point she expresses genuine concern for Jim McAlister, she's just a person from a lower middle class background (single mother who worked her way up to become a paralegal) who did not get any breaks and who wants to live what she regards as the American dream (or has been told is the American dream.) She even recognizes that she's sacrificing being popular and having fun to become successful because she works very hard and simply can't stand not getting what she wants and puts in a lot of work for.

In contrast is Paul whose multimillionaire father owns a very large cement plant. He is a genuinely nice person, but he doesn't recognize his privilege (for those who think that's a new concept) because he's stupid. I don't know if the writer of the film was trying to make the cynical point that the only people who are nice are stupid.

The reality is nature favors diversity and the world needs both idealists like McAlister and driven achievers like Flick, as flawed as they both are. The film expresses reservations with how tough achievers can be, but certainly Tracy Flick would be a much better CEO to the world than Elon Musk.

So, anyway, a very thought provoking movie, and I've left out most of the story. But, the film is also very funny even if not, for me, laugh out loud funny.

Edit to add: It's interesting how movies can get reevaluated in the same way as presidential administrations. There are some views that the character of Jim McAllister was never the idealist whose desire was to be a teacher that he told us he was, but that his character was a charming liar the whole time, including in his voice overs, and that he actually was probably never anything more than a slacker (and a creep) who 'settled' on becoming a teacher because it was a job.

I think it's also important to note that McAllister is an extremely gross and generally morally bankrupt individual.  I'd go much farther than your last paragraph and argue that although it was not the film's intent (I think the film pretty disturbingly views Flick and McAllister as more or less equally flawed), McAllister is very much the villain of the film.  While it is very well done piece of satire, the film has aged very badly, especially in light of the fact that Alexander Payne himself has faced credible allegations of statutory rape.

Between the fact that one of the big reasons he hates Tracy Flick is that he blames her (objectively a victim of statutory rape) for the fact that his best friend and one-time fellow teacher got fired for having sex with her, McCallister himself has a pedophilloic sexual fantasy about Tracy Flick, ends up destroying his marriage by having an affair, attempts to rig an irrelevant student council election due to a dumb semi-one-sided vendetta against one of his students (admittedly a rather annoying individual), etc, McAllister is objectively a pretty unstable individual who should not be allowed to work around children. 

I mean, yes, Tracy Flick is a self-absorbed and generally obnoxious/irritating individual, but there's simply no comparison here.  The dude is a horrible human being who repeatedly behaves both immorally and unethically throughout the film.  Like, he's just a really bad person.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

I think it's also important to note that McAllister is an extremely gross and generally morally bankrupt individual.  I'd go much farther than your last paragraph and argue that although it was not the film's intent (I think the film pretty disturbingly views Flick and McAllister as more or less equally flawed), McAllister is very much the villain of the film.  While it is very well done piece of satire, the film has aged very badly, especially in light of the fact that Alexander Payne himself has faced credible allegations of statutory rape.

I wasn't aware of Alexander Payne. That's sick.

Based on this, then I did miss the theme of the film. I overlooked that Tracy Flick was a woman as I thought the point was 'the 'overachiever/striver' could be male or female just as the 'idealist' could be male or female. It didn't matter.

However, given that McAllister isn't the idealist he makes himself out to be, it's clear the theme of the film was his sexism and that he couldn't handle Tracy Flick's ambition because she's a woman.

There is also the scene in the film where they're trading vague accusations and threats at each other and it seems like McAllister is really speaking about himself, but a few seconds later, it's clear he isn't.

So, based on that McAllister is a liar who lies to us about himself in his voiceovers. He's not necessarily a 'villain' he's an everyman who wants people (and probably himself) to believe that it's not that he has a problem with ambitious women, it's just that he has a problem with that ambitious woman.

I need to see the film again.

Edit to add, as with Presidential Administrations, re-evaluations can go too far. Tracy Flick is hardly some heroine either. She looks with disdain at those who lack her level of ambition. This is her quote on McAllister (who as far as she knows is simply an idealistic teacher.):

Now that I have more life experience, I feel sorry for Mr McAllister. I mean, anyone who’s stuck in the same little room, wearing the same stupid clothes, saying the exact same things year after year for all of his life, while his students go on to good colleges and move to big cities and do great things and make loads of money – he’s gotta be at least a little jealous. It’s like my mom says, the weak are always trying to sabotage the strong.”

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I think it's also important to note that McAllister is an extremely gross and generally morally bankrupt individual.  I'd go much farther than your last paragraph and argue that although it was not the film's intent (I think the film pretty disturbingly views Flick and McAllister as more or less equally flawed), McAllister is very much the villain of the film.  While it is very well done piece of satire, the film has aged very badly, especially in light of the fact that Alexander Payne himself has faced credible allegations of statutory rape.

I wasn't aware of Alexander Payne. That's sick.

Based on this, then I did miss the theme of the film. I overlooked that Tracy Flick was a woman as I thought the point was 'the 'overachiever/striver' could be male or female just as the 'idealist' could be male or female. It didn't matter.

However, given that McAllister isn't the idealist he makes himself out to be, it's clear the theme of the film was his sexism and that he couldn't handle Tracy Flick's ambition because she's a woman.

There is also the scene in the film where they're trading vague accusations and threats at each other and it seems like McAllister is really speaking about himself, but a few seconds later, it's clear he isn't.

So, based on that McAllister is a liar who lies to us about himself in his voiceovers. He's not necessarily a 'villain' he's an everyman who wants people (and probably himself) to believe that it's not that he has a problem with ambitious women, it's just that he has a problem with that ambitious woman.

I need to see the film again.

Edit to add, as with Presidential Administrations, re-evaluations can go too far. Tracy Flick is hardly some heroine either. She looks with disdain at those who lack her level of ambition. This is her quote on McAllister (who as far as she knows is simply an idealistic teacher.):

Now that I have more life experience, I feel sorry for Mr McAllister. I mean, anyone who’s stuck in the same little room, wearing the same stupid clothes, saying the exact same things year after year for all of his life, while his students go on to good colleges and move to big cities and do great things and make loads of money – he’s gotta be at least a little jealous. It’s like my mom says, the weak are always trying to sabotage the strong.”

I’m not saying Tracy Flick is a good person, only that McAllister is significantly worse.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I've enjoyed Ghostbusters bring me back to my childhood with Ghostbusters with Tracy, Eddie and Jake. But, all the movies end the same way Aquaman, as well with defeat of an Ice Demon

[John Dule]

I finally watched Bone Tomahawk, which has been on my watchlist for years. First off, it operates on a very narrow budget, and it shows. The flat, digital cinematography detracts significantly from the movie's callbacks to classic westerns, and its attempt to reconstruct the genre suffers for it. The lack of extras, especially in the scenes in Bright Hope (a town that apparently has a population over 200, from which only four people can be rallied for a posse), is conspicuous. Some of the supporting performances, particularly Lili Simmons, ring hollow and do not feel period-accurate. It was shot in 21 days-- obviously in the same southern California terrain that M*A*S*H once tried to convince us was actually Korea.

But once it gets underway, the movie is extremely compelling. Zahler knows the limitations of his time and budget and knows exactly where to focus as a result: subtle character moments, dialogue, and crafting a sense of impending doom. When the money shot comes, it's far more impactful as a result. Even I (warped as my mind is by the horrors of the internet) found myself watching the end of this movie bug-eyed and slack-jawed. That takes some doing.

I also appreciate the film for its unapologetic disinterest in "subverting expectations," "deconstructing tropes," or introducing plot twists for the sake of plot twists. It is a character piece-- it hones in on the interactions between its limited cast and builds the stakes of their story with a relentless commitment to graphic, violent realism. It ignores multiple opportunities to indulge in cynical nihilism or postmodernism-- not to say that those themes don't have their time and place, but the movie understands that audiences are getting bored with them. You don't have to enjoy right-wing tribalist tales of men and horses to recognize that this is a strong installment in that genre.

I maintain that the movie's many flaws break the immersion at times (more than its fans care to admit), but that doesn't change the fact that this is an astonishingly solid first effort from an untested director, and on a shoestring budget no less.

[ProudModerate2]

Ghostbusters Frozen Empire.
Went to the theatre yesterday to watch this movie.
It was fine/OK.
Would rate it about a 5 out of 10.


Looking somewhat forward to watching : The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
I believe it starts this Friday April 19.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Just finished the Amazon Prime Fallout tv show. I was very surprised by how much I enjoyed it.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Enjoyed Fallout more than I expected, despite the abject cheesiness and (apparent) low special effects budget. The rumors of complaints from the right I'd heard about seem poorly founded, though the series has a very present anti-corporate (anti-capitalist, even) message in the second half. One is led to think that the primary thing that certain people disliked was the presence of non-white characters. The first few episodes on their own were actually amusingly right-wing--apparently poorer outsiders are shown to be an existential threat to [civilization], and those who would seek the barbarians' rehabilitation are fools.

[lfromnj]

Enjoyed Fallout more than I expected, despite the abject cheesiness and (apparent) low special effects budget. The rumors of complaints from the right I'd heard about seem poorly founded, though the series has a very present anti-corporate (anti-capitalist, even) message in the second half. One is led to think that the primary thing that certain people disliked was the presence of non-white characters. The first few episodes on their own were actually amusingly right-wing--apparently poorer outsiders are shown to be an existential threat to [civilization], and those who would seek the barbarians' rehabilitation are fools.

One of the quests in fallout 3 has a similar ending. The "good" ending is persuading everyone to be Kumbaya and accept ghouls into their community but it turns out if that happens a few weeks later the ghouls kill everyone.

[Progressive Pessimist]

The reaction to 'Rebel Moon Part 2' seems to be another instance of people realizing that Emperor Snyder has no clothes. I'm of the opinion that he never had clothes to begin with, so I'm hardly surprised.

Why watch this when 'Dune Part 2' just became available to own and rent?

[Landslide Lyndon]

The reaction to 'Rebel Moon Part 2' seems to be another instance of people realizing that Emperor Snyder has no clothes. I'm of the opinion that he never had clothes to begin with, so I'm hardly surprised.

Why watch this when 'Dune Part 2' just became available to own and rent?

I actually liked 300 and Watchmen (although it's obvious in the latter that he bit more than he could chew). But after the awful Man of Steel he has become a more pretentious Michael Bay.
Rebel Moon Part One was boring and Part Two is borderline unwatchable trash. The fact that at the end he leaves the door wide open for a sequel just shows his lack of self-awareness.

[vitoNova]

As someone whose Fallout adventure began with FO4, I still felt those feels when Lucy unveiled the New California Republic flag (because that's the Fallout 4 theme).

Railroad forever.